Traffic backs up on the Wilson Bridge. (File photo)

By Alan Sipress
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, April 16, 1999; Page A1

A federal judge dealt a staggering blow yesterday to the planned replacement of the deteriorating Woodrow Wilson Bridge, blocking construction until further environmental review is done and raising the prospect that a new crossing may not be erected before heavy trucks are banned from the existing span.

The ruling, issued reluctantly by U.S. District Judge Stanley Sporkin in Washington, drew cheers from Alexandria community activists battling to scale back the mammoth $1.8 billion project, but government and business leaders predicted that regional paralysis would result.

In response to a lawsuit by Alexandria activists, Sporkin found that the Federal Highway Administration had failed to adequately consider alternatives to the proposed 12-lane drawbridge, in particular a 10-lane version favored by some city residents and environmentalists. He also ruled that the federal government had not properly evaluated any increase in air pollution from vehicles using a 12-lane bridge or the project's impact on historic sites in Alexandria.

Sporkin, faulting the highway administration for flouting four different federal statutes, ordered the agency to revive its review and perform it properly. He set no deadline for this evaluation to be finished. The absence of a time frame stunned some bridge proponents, who had anticipated that the judge might order additional review but expected he would not allow it to be open-ended.

The Washington region now confronts the prospect that its premier Potomac River crossing -- used by 190,000 vehicles a day -- could crumble before a new span is erected and that commerce could be choked along Interstate 95, the East Coast's main artery.

Sporkin himself wrote that he was reluctant to slow a "sorely needed" project and suggested that Congress might intervene to save the bridge from "the regulatory gridlock that has developed."

Engineers have determined that the Wilson Bridge is about five years from the end of its useful life. The span is disintegrating under the weight of three times the volume of traffic it was designed to carry when it opened in 1961.

Crews from the Virginia Department of Transportation, which is responsible for maintaining the bridge, have been working to replace crumbling concrete. Because of metal fatigue, vibrations on the span are greater than expected. Last month, officials decided that the steel grate on the draw span would have to be replaced this winter at a cost of $3.6 million.

Highway officials have said that if the life of the bridge must be extended beyond 2004, they may try to slow its deterioration by diverting the 14,000 heavy trucks that use the span each day. The final determination on whether to ban heavy trucks would probably be made by the highway administration in consultation with state agencies.

Design work on the new span is already well underway, and the coalition of federal and state agencies developing the project had planned to request a construction permit in three months from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, clearing the way to begin work in October 2000.

The sudden setback comes at a time when momentum seemed to be growing behind the project. This winter, the City of Alexandria dropped its long-standing fight against the new span after reaching a compromise with federal and state governments over a variety of design elements, raising the hope among bridge advocates that legal opposition had run its course.

But Alexandria community activists refused to buckle, and yesterday they bested a powerful coalition of federal, state and local officials as well as business leaders. "It's been like David battling Goliath," said Robert Montague III, chairman of the Alexandria Historical Restoration and Preservation Commission. "We are a group of volunteer citizens. We've been up against massive forces."

Judy McVay, co-chair of the Coalition for a Sensible Bridge, said the activists were vindicated by Sporkin's conclusion that the federal government had improperly evaluated a smaller version of the project and then, after completing the review, scaled its dimensions upward.

"To me," she said, "it was a no-brainer: You can't get blueprints for a two-bedroom house and then build a 20-room mansion."

Federal officials declined to comment on the ruling. Bridge proponents predicted that it may be impossible to complete the project before trucks must be banned.

"It's terrible," said Robert Grow, transportation director for the Greater Washington Board of Trade. "A study that takes four to six months and we'll be flirting with disaster to extend it for that long."

For one of the two new spans to open before weight restrictions are imposed, the contractor must begin pouring the concrete footings in October 2000. To meet that schedule, officials must apply to the Corps of Engineers for a permit in July and, after review by the engineers as well as other federal and state environmental agencies, obtain approval next April, according to the development schedule.

The long lead time reflects an environmental prohibition on performing bridge work in the water except between October and February in order to minimize the disruption to fish that spawn on the Maryland side and the growth of vegetation along the riverbed. "The schedule is razor thin," said John R. Undeland, spokesman for the bridge project.

Sporkin criticized the highway administration for inconsistencies in its review. He said, for instance, that federal officials improperly dismissed the 10-lane design as a practical alternative but then used a 10-lane option, rather than 12-lane, as the basis of its conclusion that a new bridge would comply with the air emissions standards of the Clear Air Act.

The judge came to the conclusion that "the project needs to be rethought." As an indication of what might be included in that "rethinking process," he suggested consideration of an entirely new design, such as a suspension bridge rather than a drawbridge.

The suggestion that the project should be completely reconsidered drew fire from Rep. James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), who helped broker the recent compromise with Alexandria. "The fact is, we have spent more time and more energy and more public input on this project than on any federal project in American history," he said.

Moran said he would seek to convene a meeting Monday of all Washington area members of Congress in a bid to craft legislation that might speed the resumption of the bridge project without setting a precedent that would gut the country's environmental oversight.

Many Virginia officials also reacted angrily to the ruling, saying a truck ban would have devastating consequences for drivers along the Capital Beltway in Fairfax County. Highway officials predict that trucks could be diverted across the American Legion Bridge or use Route 1 and Interstate 395 to cut through the District.

"It's a little unfortunate that a small group of citizens with a narrow agenda can hold up a major regional project like this," said Fairfax City Mayor John Mason, the vice chairman of the Northern Virginia Transportation Coordinating Council.

Virginia Secretary of Transportation Shirley Ybarra suggested that some bridge engineering and initial work in the river may be able to proceed despite the court order.

In Maryland, Transportation Secretary John D. Porcari said: "We can't afford any delay on this project. This is the state's top transportation priority."

Staff writers Patricia Davis, Robert E. Pierre, Michael D. Shear and Jackie Spinner contributed to this report.